<p>Rivera’s paper (linked in post #10) is pretty interesting. And pretty shocking, really. It’s based on interviews with an extremely narrow band of employers—big investment banks, blue chip law firms, elite management consulting firms, seemingly all New York-based, but I’m not absolutely certain of that. In that rarefied world, Columbia, Brown, Dartmouth, and Duke are apparently perceived as “second-tier” institutions. More alarming, though, is the class bias that comes through in these employers’ hiring patterns, and in how they described what they were looking for. Not only were these employers looking for graduates of HYP-Wharton (Penn Arts & Sciences need not apply), but the employers were looking for candidates with the right “polish” and “well-roundedness” (= indicia of high socio-economic status) and the “right” extracurriculars (e.g., crew, lacrosse, other prep school sports played predominantly by kids from high SES backgrounds). In short, according to the study, they’re essentially looking to perpetuate the elite old-boy network that launched their own careers. Diversity was far down their list of employment criteria–as were grades, the thought apparently being that if you’re smart enough to get into Harvard, you’re smart enough to be one of us, and we, of course, are smarter than anyone else on the planet . . . even if you did pull a B- average in college. </p>
<p>Had to work to help pay for college, leaving not enough time for crew? You have our sympathy, but you don’t get the job.</p>
<p>Shockingly ignorant and offensive attitudes on many fronts, in my opinion, if what’s reported here is an accurate reflection. It should be emphasized, however, that this is one study of a very narrow band of employers by one researcher, and it’s a “study” with a lot of interpretive spin. </p>
<p>However accurate Rivera’s portrayal of the employers she interviewed, I should think the rest of corporate America, which doesn’t have the luxury of filling its ranks entirely or almost entirely with graduates of HYP-Wharton, would take a different, and broader, view.</p>